The Gun Laws that Won't Work... At All!

In reaction to, sadly, another incident that occurred in California last week, I thought I would post about some issues that will most likely be a hot topic very soon. I have already written about some of the gun control legislation that could work, but here are some of the things that have been proven completely ineffective at controlling gun violence.

1. Ban on standard capacity magazines. I refuse to call them "high-capacity" because most guns have over a 10-round magazine that come as standard. Having a "low-capacity" magazine of only 10 rounds does absolutely NOTHING to prevent accidents like this happening. It is purely a feel good law to make people feel like the government is taking action. The only thing this law does is prevent law abiding citizens from being able to defend themselves more effectively. Plus, this only proves the point that criminals have no intention of obeying laws in the first place.
2. More gun-free zones. It has been proven time and time again that gun-free zones are magnets for horrible crimes. People want "common sense" gun laws, so why is this so difficult for people to believe that criminals flock to these places where it is easier to commit a crime? No guns = no resistance. It is the exact same reason why mass shootings don't happen in places where people could fight back. Robbers (at least the smart ones) don't attempt to steal from a home with armed residents inside.
3. Assault weapon ban. "Assault weapons" are already banned in California. So the recent shooters did what any criminal would do, they BROKE THE LAW. I'm not saying we should all walk around armed with an M4, but its goes to show that the laws that are currently in place do nothing to stop crazy people from doing crazy things.
4. Gun Confiscation. Despite what the New York Times says, this is the worst possible solution. Explanation is not needed.

Laws that have remained untested:

1. Expanded background checks. President Obama mentioned this when he addressed the nation after the attack in San Bernardino. While I don't mind expanding the background checks, Obama spoke about preventing people that are on the "watch" or "no-fly" list from purchasing a firearm. While this sounds good in theory, there are many people that have been put on this list without their knowing, or accidentally, and there is NO way to remove yourself from it. You can't even look your name up to find if you've been put on the list. There have been senators that have been put on this list and to this day, we don't know how it happened. Until we can get this process sorted, expanded background checks via this method won't do us much good. 

What does this mean?

It means that we need to do our best to make sure that everyone knows that this was an act of terror caused by terrorists. It was not caused by the guns they used. It's an injustice to those that were lost if we blame the tools more than those who committed these atrocities. As horrifying as these acts were, we should learn from this experience and adapt. California has all of the laws that gun control advocates want, and it did not matter. 

My recommendation to my readers would be to purchase a firearm that you feel comfortable using. It could be a shotgun, pistol, rifle of any caliber. Go once a month to the range nearest you and practice loading, unloading, and handling the weapon. If you don't know where to start, sign up for a firearms introduction class. At home, make sure you have a safe place to store it so that you can retrieve it fast but also keep it safely away from those whom you don't want to have access to it. If you were on the fence about buying a firearm for any reason, now is a better time than any to take action.